Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:56, 25 July 2006

Welcome!

Hello, Illythr, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Misplaced Pages:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  RJFJR 01:27, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm sure I'm not a bot (for one thing, bots don't go on wiki-sickleave). Welcome to the wikipedia. We're a friendly bunch here. RJFJR 01:58, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Romanian

Do you speak romanian? I see that you come from Chisinau. --Chisinau 16:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Erm, too late, I guess... On a very basic level. --Illythr 18:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Creationism

(cross-posted from my talk page) Thanks for your support, MrMonkey! Yes, I agree that his behavior has been quite disappointing, especially his more recent ones. But I am still confident that he can continue as a productive editor. I'm not ready to brand him a troll, although of course his recent behavior crossed the line into trolling. But I don't recall him ever vandalizising articles, though he has certainly made edits with which I disagree. Of course, I could easily have missed them, but resorting to vandalism doesn't seem like something Scorpionman would do. If it's something recent, then as Illythr mentions I certainly would appreciate a link; if not, I think we can let it go. I think it is actually useful to have different viewpoints around. Unfortunately, Scorpionman's comments so far have been largely unhelpful, mainly criticizing various scientific theories using a web site whose purpose is to " the authority of the Bible" and which states "The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs." He may be correct and all appearances to the contrary, today's life forms may have been created separately ex nihilio, but such speculation hardly belongs in a science article as if it were somehow approaching the matter from a scientific perspective or as if there problems with science beyond its perceived conflict with some religious ideas. Perhaps he will understand this with time, perhaps not; my purpose is not to change his religious beliefs but to show that arguing them on article talk pages is not appropriate. — Knowledge Seeker দ 03:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Illythr, for your kind words. I shall preserve them on my user page. I believe that we can accomplish most through courtesy, logic, and reason. Of course, I have no desire to change anyone's religious beliefs—reading a religious text is certainly a possible way of learning about the world—although science has been far more successful than any religion in explaining the mechanics of how the world works. — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:20, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Tali-Ihantala

Hi. Please don't do grammar checking for most of the contents of Battle of Tali-Ihantala as its content is currently totally out of touch with reality. Somebody had mixed Battle of Valkeasaari with Tali-Ihantala and edited things from there to the article. --Whiskey 11:36, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Meh, sorry. I'm just such a correction maniac... --Illythr 11:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Transnistria stubs

I've made a little over a hundred stubs for Transnistria, here: Category:Transnistria_stubs. If you have the time or the inclination then some of them could be expanded or moved into different languages, like German or Russian. - Mauco 00:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Transnistria

Thanks for pointing out that link. I actually did not intend to give that address, I think I was still learning how to use references and I copied one about the Moldovan census. In any case I corrected it now. The link opens an archive of documents, among which there is one entitled Implicarea Armatei a XIV-a, or the Participation of the 14th army prepared by the Altemedia Research Institute. The argument presented there is that the 14th Army was directly involved in the armed conflict and aided the separatists. I cannot assess the basis of that argument as I wasn't there, however it does present an important side of the debate upheld by many adherents. TSO1D 23:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I would be glad to look at your list. TSO1D 23:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I satisfy both points D:. TSO1D 00:01, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Moldovans

Illythr, could you please do me a favor and look at the picture on Moldovans. I don't seem to recognize any of the people depicted, maybe you know some of them. TSO1D 00:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the info about the pictures. TSO1D 13:24, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Soviet movies

I thought so. If you have some more info, my e-mail is dpotop1 at the Yahoo mail server under the commercial superdomain. Dpotop 16:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

War of Transnistria

The Altermedia file was a pdf file part of the altermedia archive linked to. The article is only in Romanian though, and pretty biased from I could see, so I removed it. The political studies article is indeed vague as you pointed out, the sentence you found is the only direct mention of the 14th army's involvement, but it still backs the theory. The last one is the best I could find, and I saw that it was cited in various other books and articles on the subject and it is pretty comprehensive. TSO1D 00:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The rar archive containing the file is here, and the name of the particular file is: Implicarea Amramtei a XIV-a în Conflictul Transnistrean. I also copied the text to User:TSO1D\tc. TSO1D 02:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

a simple request

Please read this: . Thank you. Adriatikus 08:10, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Say what?

I'm afraid you did not get me. First of all, I don't have to mind any grammatical changes whatsoever: on the principle advocated by Node, different spelling=different language (so it shall be not "this" or "that Russian", but "some kind of Russian" - it'll do just fine); judging by Node's standards, all I'll have to do is this, the rest being entirely up to me (whether I may want to invent verbs, whether I may want to consider three words in a row "an article" etc.).

Now, moving beyond such plans. I think you are a reasonable and highly intelligent person, Illythr, and I'm glad that you contribute on these articles with a balanced perspective. I originally edited on pages dealing with Moldova only because the Romanian POV was not straying away from the most annoying themes that I have come to detest in our nationalism (and, thus, it seemed to go nowhere); on the whole, I'd rather edit something else, but when I saw the standard of quality tolerated on debated pages, I feel my blood boil. I need to express this very clearly (as I have had before): I do not support Moldo-Romanian unification. However, when editing here I bumped into the other side, and into tantrum-like reactions - as exemplified by Node_ue and occasionaly by Mikkalai on Talk:Moldovans, as seen in the repetitive "Romanian=fascist". I can even accept a large part of that from a certain perspective: as I have said before, my country's climate has almost always been oscillating between blatant indifference for the other and all-out banditry (just look at what we did to Bender-Zadunaysky!); as I have said before, a sizeable portion of Ro contributors still advocate morally bankrupt principles. Fine - I can live within that internal ideological chasm.

However (and I believe we can reach an agreement here): if an ethnicity, as I have said before, is always subjective (which makes it exist the moment it is stated), a language is not. A language is not: that is a fact which is void of consequences (I, for one, am not going to build any politicial scheme based on that). A language is not, not only because that would be nonsensical, but because pretending this is not the case would also be without consequence (political identity relies on it only in a Volkgeist-infused society - not in Belgium, not even in France, but in Romania: it is especially ironic that a Moldovan identity needs to use the same crapola my indifferent-to-bandit-like society has been using...). Hoping we see eye to eye. Dahn 17:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I didn't sign in with an email. Do you have one made public where I can send you mine? If not, we could carry on here. Dahn 18:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I did. That "email this user" link to the left should work. --Illythr 18:27, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

See... I have never used that before... didn't even know it was there, to tell you. Anyway, I'm on it. Dahn 18:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Sent. Dahn 18:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the huge delay. Did you get my reply? Dahn 23:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

"...but don't understand the Latin script having never learned a Latin-based language before."

This is you here: .
I don't want to start a flame/off-topic war, neither here, nor on meta.wiki (that's why I didn't write it there), but can you tell me what script were you using in the sentence above ? Do you think it's logical what you claim ? -- Adriatikus 00:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read it again. ...having never learned a Latin-based language before.. I learned English as a second language and German as the third (as can be clearly seen on my user page). Besides, I live in Chisinau, so when I went to school back in 1989, we already were taught Moldovan/Romanian based on the Latin script. That whole passage in Cyrillic was me playing by your rules, a pointless effort, its only positive consequence being the respect of DPotop, that is all. --Illythr 01:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I hope I won't have to clarify this there, as at least one user appears to understand what I was saying.

Hmm, that before is rather superfluous there, too, by the way. --Illythr 01:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Foolish child, if you still think playing stands for arguments... I just wanted you to say you did it on purpose. So I can say you're closer to Node's behavior than I thought. Adriatikus 01:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

See my responce there. For the last time, I'm NOT DISCUSSING THE VALIDITY OF THE LANGUAGE! Neither did I ever intend to provide any arguments for your silly campaign. Because, actually, I believe that you're right and Moldovan is no more than a dialect of Romanian. However, I also believe that you can't just forget about all the people who were taught it all these years and those that still are. --Illythr 02:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

And mine. (briefly: I agree) Adriatikus 02:17, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I uh, seem to have misjudged you for a cold, calculating and ruthless professional lobbyist. My apologies. --Illythr 02:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Igor Smirnov

Hi Illythr,

Sorry for the delay of the reply. I've written the nationality of Igor Smirnov in that manner in the article because I would like to emphasize the fact that he's not from Moldova or Transnistria, and the fact that the Transnistria administration is closely linked to the Kremlin, basically.--MaGioZal 04:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Moldovan, again

I am sorry, I don't really have the time to re-read the entire thread at "Deletion of Moldovan wiki", to see whether you would agree with the following proposal. I am therefore asking directly. Would you support a moldovan wikipedia that is simply a gateway to the transliteration tool of Bogdan Giusca?

• http://mcworld.org/McChirilic/?pagina=Limba_moldoveneasc%C4%83

That is:

• The http://mo.wikipedia.org still existing (maybe moved to mo-cyr, as Dmitriid proposed), but with no pages inside. When accessed, this site simply translates the main page of ro.wikipedia. Then, doing navigation on ro.wikipedia using cyrillic script is easy. And I presume that at least about half the pages will have no problems for searching (but the searching problem is more difficult, it assumes someone maintains and refines the transliteration tool until it's near-perfect).

What do you think about it? Dpotop 06:04, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'll be able to convince them. I can try, though... --Illythr 00:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I want to raise an issue here. Let's say the engine transliterates the Romanian version of an article on the Turkish alphabet: would it not attempt to transliterate the letters of the alphabet itself? Could it be prevented from doing that? Dahn 23:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm not the creator of this tool, but I see that that does indeed present an intriguing compication. Hmm... --Illythr 00:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

History of Moldova

The article had a few sections with some obvious bias, and I trimmed that down a little, but the content is not different from the agreed-upond version found on other articles. I am confident I can avoid the Neo-Stalinist label, at least for now. TSO1D 19:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Did you receive....

...my e-mail? Adriatikus 23:20, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Unless you're Dahn, no, I didn't. --Illythr 01:03, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Smirnov

Lol, I didn't know you had an entire conversation about this. Yea, definitely be bold in such cases. Having the nationality of a person in the very first sentence of a head of state is not common usage, and not proper. TSO1D 02:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Invitation to join Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy

Hi there! I've noticed that you've edited articles pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. I wanted to extend an invitation to you to join the WikiProject dedicated to organizing and improving articles on the subject, which can be found at: WikiProject Eastern Orthodoxy. This WikiProject was begun because a need was perceived to raise the level of quality of articles on Misplaced Pages which deal with the Eastern Orthodox Church.

You can find information on the project page about the WikiProject, as well as how to join and how to indicate that you are a member of the project. Additionally, you may be interested in helping out with our collaboration of the month. I hope you'll consider joining and thank you for your contributions thus far! —A.S. Damick 12:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)